Kotaku is citing two unnamed sources that it says "have a perfect track record in getting these kinds of things right" to report that Microsoft's follow-up to the Xbox 360 will need a working Internet connection to start games and apps. And the site goes on to write that the system will only tolerate brief interruptions in that connection while the game or app is being used.

"Unless something has changed recently, Durango consumer units must have an active Internet connection to be used," one source told the site, referring to the internal code name for Microsoft's next system. "If there isn't a connection, no games or apps can be started. If the connection is interrupted, then after a period of time—currently three minutes, if I remember correctly—the game/app is suspended and the network troubleshooter started." Another source said this requirement was still in effect on development hardware as recently as two weeks ago.

Information suggesting that the next Microsoft console will need to be online is nothing new; numerousleaksand rumors have pointed in that direction throughout the last year or so. However, this is the first serious suggestion that such connectivity would need to be more or less continuous while a game is being played, rather than just checked once when a game or app is launched.

Requiring a persistent Internet connection, if true, would seemingly limit the audience for Microsoft's next system. Even today, only 68.2 percent of households in the United States have access to broadband Internet, according to the OECD. Surveys show that this includes 90 percent of homes with a computer, and that access tracks heavily with income (a 2010 study found that 73 percent of US Xbox 360 owners had broadband in the home). Broadband subscription rates are much lower in developing countries like Russia and Brazil, which just got Xbox Live service in 2010 (each is seen as an emerging market for game consoles). On the other hand, an online check could limit the impact of piracy and/or the resale of secondhand games, which Microsoft and many game publishers see as having a dramatic effect on their bottom line.

Of course, this is all still rumor for now, and Microsoft doesn't comment on rumors and speculation as a matter of course. Even if it's true at the moment, the company could reverse itself before officially announcing the system, which is widely expected to hit stores by the end of the year. Microsoft could even use a firmware update to remove any sort of Internet requirement after the system launches if there is enough public outcry (or market impact).

Share this story

Kyle Orland
Kyle is the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica, specializing in video game hardware and software. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He is based in the Washington, DC area. Emailkyle.orland@arstechnica.com//Twitter@KyleOrl

"Unless something has changed recently, Durango consumer units must have an active Internet connection to be used,"

How are they commenting on Durango consumer units before the consumer product has even been announced? Given the SuperDaE shenanigans and Microsoft's insistence on keeping the nextXbox under wraps with camouflaged paint schemes, wouldn't it make sense that developer units are required to be online constantly in order to prevent leaks or stolen machines?

They could also be testing the functionality for consumer units using those developer boxes.

I am sure they are gauging the public comments, feasibility of the disc DRM and developer wants. At least we have Kickstarters with non DRM games. Now for the projects to maybe put in some money towards a controller based UI and controls for some Steam Big Picture options. Or even sell it as a $3-$5 DLC.

I understand why Microsoft or Sony would want to do that but it strikes me as an incredibly bad idea. Not everyone has broadband internet. Even if they do have broadband internet it isn't always reliable or necessarily wired up where they want a gaming console and wireless can be unreliable. If they do go live with this in place I'm sure it will cost them sales both from people who can't use their new console for one reason or another and from people who object on principle and won't buy one even tho they could use it successfully.

I have an always-on internet connection, and I've got my 360 wired to my router, and I honestly can't recall ever having an interruption in my internet service (excluding power outages); practically speaking, they could have snuck this requirement into the 360 at some point and I wouldn't have noticed. Moreover, I've been a paid XBL subscriber for more than ten years (I've got the avatar helmet to prove it!), and I've got somewhere around 100 games for the 360.

Even with all of that being true, if the neXtBox releases with these requirements, I won't be buying one

I suspect they're risking far more than the 27% of the existing XBox market who literally can't use a console with these restrictions if they follow through on them.

Strikes me as a way to control development boxes, not actual hardware.

This is exactly what I was thinking. It is a great way to control the dev boxes access while also providing an excellent way to report bugs during the alpha and beta phases of developing the hardware. After all of the bitching regarding this style of DRM and the lack of Internet connections fast/stable enough to handle it - I doubt Microsoft will make the mistake of shooting themselves in the foot like this.

That said, I really hope they don't nerf used games like the rumors have been saying. That would pretty much keep me firmly in PC gaming more than anything else.

Even though my console is basically always connected to the internet there have been plenty of times when my Comcrap connection has dropped for periods of time. Don't punish me, the guy that wants to give you my money, for the failings of my ISP.

DRM will be as strict as people will tolerate. If people accept one form of DRM, over time people will get used to it and in the future stricter DRM will be used. That's why if you want to stop the ever marching loss of your freedom and convenience, you must oppose DRM on principle before it becomes severe. Unfortunately, people only think in the short term and say "I can live with that" and go along the path of least resistance, which screws them in the long run.

Are you serious? You're deciding between two consoles several months before either is released, and before one has even been officially announced, based on a vague rumor that probably applies only to development units, as it did with the Xbox 360.

I live in a developing country which has sporadic internet problems (haven't experienced them in a while but it happens). While I do have broadband, some of my friends do not have at their homes. I routinely brought my now sold Xbox 360 to play games at their homes. I hope Microsoft takes this scenario into account. I will take this into consideration when buying a next gen console.

I am withholding my judgement until the official announcement, but I am holding my breath...

I own a PS3 and XBox 360. I bought a Wii U and upgraded the graphics card in my HTPC to a GTX 680. It is precisely because of this type of draconian BS that those will most likely be my last gaming hardware purchases for the remainder of this decade.

Strikes me as a way to control development boxes, not actual hardware.

I'm inclined to think this as well. while I'm not a huge fan of MS and have always been on the Sony side of the console equation, I don't think MS is dumb enough to go this route. If anything it seems MS is just using draconian DRM to keep their dev consoles under wraps, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to do I think.

IF they ever did do this though, it seems clear they would be shooting themselves in the foot. Having finally gotten the edge over Sony, I don't see them giving that up.